Dr Clive Marks has provided a detailed assessment and sound reasons why the scientific aspects of Tasmania’s decade-long war on foxes needs to be independently reviewed.

The fox program began in 2002 with the cliché logo of a ‘fox-free’ taskforce and morphed into a full-blown fox eradication program. The program was reliant on an unproven hypothesis of multiple fox introductions; a fox detection process reliant on finding only their faeces and an elimination policy using one untested approach - buried poisoned meat.

There are numerous reasons to question the genuineness of the whole program and the public policy that supports it.

Firstly there is no evidence of fox breeding in Tasmania.

Secondly there is no legislation that allows a Tasmanian government official to inspect or search for foxes on all Tasmanian properties; let alone attempt to eradicate them. By contrast if they had knowledge of the presence of a serious exotic animal disease - like Foot-and-Mouth Disease - on a Tasmanian property, they would automatically trigger State laws allowing government officers the legal right of entry to inspect any property and take whatever steps necessary to eliminate that serious disease-causing agent. Their actions would be enforced ‘by law’.

So in 2010 what is different about the public policy applied to European red foxes?

If the Tasmanian government believes that foxes are the worst threat to Tasmania’s biodiversity since the Last Ice Age (a definitive statement offered by a DPIPWE scientist appearing before the recent joint Parliamentary Committee) and the State genuinely believes they have the most effective method of eliminating them, why would they not enact legislation to allow for unfettered access to all Tasmanian properties?

The failure to have this legal power is most puzzling and indicates a lack of sincere resolve.

Thirdly even accepting the assumption that foxes have established breeding populations here - a singular reliance on the use of buried poisons to kill all foxes over a landmass the size of Tasmania is particularly troubling. How does that activity work?

Fourthly, there are concerns with the financial administration of this public policy. Even during the period of the Howard government (up to late 2007) it was extremely reluctant to agree to David Llewellyn’s 2006 application for a $56 million, 10-year funding package for fox ‘eradication’. As Tasmanian Liberal Senator Eric Abetz highlighted in 2007, if Tasmania is still eradicating foxes in 2016 then the program has clearly failed. To rely so heavily on Commonwealth funds to eliminate an unwanted mammal, when the location, abundance and behaviours of these animals are still to be defined and the effectiveness of the tool of eradication is questioned, smacks of financial opportunism.

Fifthly, normally a cart is put before the horse; but what is driving the Tasmanian fox program? To date there has not been one peer-reviewed scientific paper on the field studies from a decade-long program despite the employment of large numbers of biologists, scientists and field staff and an investment of over $40 million of public funds. Forensic methods such as identification of scats and individual animal identification by DNA techniques have been used. Infra-red sensor cameras, fox-attractant lures at bait stations and night-vision equipment have all been purchased. Since 2005, 56 DNA-positive fox faeces have been recovered by scat-detector dogs from multiple sites across the Tasmania yet those fox faeces remain unsupported by any corroborative evidence of live foxes.

HOBART, AAP - Authorities in Tasmania have been hunting for a live fox almost as long as the US military has been scouring Afghanistan for Osama bin Laden, with about as much luck.

Before 2000, it was accepted that the Apple Isle was fox-free, but authorities have found scats - fox droppings - as well as four carcasses scattered throughout the state.

An extensive baiting program began to eradicate the pest, which plagues many parts of mainland Australia, but a live fox is yet to be found.

According to official figures, in the four years up to June 2011, a program which has uncovered 56 scats will have cost the taxpayer more $20 million.

That’s more than $300,000 a turd.

However, the problem would be more costly if foxes took hold, according to Alan Johnston, the fox eradication program manager at the Tasmanian Department of Primary Industries and Wildlife.

“We still believe there is a relatively small fox problem in the state,” Mr Johnston tells AAP.

“There is, however, overwhelming evidence to suggest there are foxes in the state and we’re acting on that basis.

“We’re also well aware that if foxes get established in the state the impacts will be significant.

“The evidence says they’re there and we need to get on and do something now while we’ve got the opportunity to do it.”

But Clive Marks, the former head of the Victorian government’s Vertebrate Pest Research Department, says he has seen no conclusive proof.

“What I’ve said is that either foxes are completely established in Tasmania and we’ll never get rid of them, or they’re not there at all,” Dr Marks tells AAP.

“This incredible paradigm is really related to the lack of irrefutable evidence and the lack of knowledge that the program has produced.

“The evidence is not there one way or the other, so you can’t conclude anything.”

Dr Marks questions the science used to justify the baiting program.

“If you base it upon a belief that there are foxes in a particular area and then you apply a baiting program in that area, then you have no way of measuring whether that program is successful or not,” he says.

“This is just a ridiculous environment to be administering a control program.”

Dr Marks says the fact that a fox den has not been discovered in Burnie - where the foxes supposedly first landed on the island - also raises issues about the entire eradication program.

“If you’ve had an urban fox population in an urban area that small, and you’ve had six breeding seasons, and you can’t find a den, then you’ve only got two options - that they’re not there or that the people looking for them are incompetent,” he says.

“If foxes are breeding, they must have a breeding den.

“In all of Tasmania, there hasn’t been a single breeding den found. I find that strange, but there might be a reason for it.”

Mr Johnston said the department will take Dr Marks’ criticism on board, but said the baiting program will continue.

“He’s obviously a well-respected scientist in his field, so we’ll look at those comments in the appropriate forum,” he says.

“But we consider those comments against all the information that’s available.”

Mr Johnston says comments raising doubts about the program could potentially undermine it.

“This is a program which will only succeed if we’ve got community support,” he says.

“We need access to people’s land, and we need the public to remain vigilant so we can record sightings.”

The program could take another four years, or more.

There’s a chance Osama could be found by then.

AAP pbc/

Brendan King, AM Breakfast, Wednesday:

Are there foxes in Tasmania?

listen now | download audio

There are more than 10 million feral foxes in Australia, but scientists are still debating whether or not foxes have become established in Tasmania. Fewer than 10 have ever been shown to be alive on the island state. A fox expert is calling on the Tasmanian government to reconsider its $40 million fox eradication program, saying it’s a lot of money to spend when the existence of foxes on the island state is very much in doubt.

OK so one thing we know about foxes is that they are very cunning . Another thing we know is that due to a supposedly sighting of a fox on Bruny Island that they are acustomed to travelling on ferries ,which is how they evidently arrived in Tasmania.
Could it be ,bearing in mind that fox scats have been found by trained sniffer dogs across the state,that these cunning animals are using Tasmania as a holiday destination and hop on the Bass Strait ferry at will from either state as they see fit.
Due to the fact that no foxes have been officially sighted in Tasmania in ten years of searching and a reward of five thousand dollars has not been claimed i believe my theory has merit.
With respect for our ever vigilant Tasmanian fox task force i believe the closest they have come to finding a fox was the day an officer spotted a dead animal on the Midland Highway.He certainly did the right thing and took it away for positive identification.
What a pity it turned out to be someone’s pet jack russel terrier that had been run over.
Let that Federal money keep on rolling in and with any luck maybe one that overstayed his visit will be captured for all to see .

Posted by d.i.nicholas on 26/07/10 at 02:49 PM

As I understand it, one of the ways of ‘making’ money in Tasmania is to convince politicians of a need that requires money from elsewhere (e.g. federal) to satisfy. Flood mitigation pilings, E Tamar highways, new road works or whatever.

The politician(s) benefits by being able to claim to ‘bring money into the state/council’ and ‘create jobs’.

Best if the money is to be spent locally because then the support of a range of potential recipients can be guaranteed. That group forms a ‘lobby’ group that validates the ‘need’ to help the politicians to decide.

If the money comes through, then it’s vital to try to keep the money flowing - positive reports, phone calls from the money recipients (e.g. big earthmoving companies) and so on.

It’s also important that initial quotes are kept small, to contain any embarrassment for asking for too much, but large enough to be an embarrassment if the initial amount isn’t topped up with more.

It’s basically a bludger’s approach to economic development that relies on draining the pockets of the powerless (taxpayers) to advantage the recipients.

Whether it applies in this case is anyone’s guess (!)

Posted by Mike Bolan on 26/07/10 at 05:05 PM

A good synopsis Mike [comment #2] - I have heard all sorts of justifications for turning a blind eye to this pilfering of Commonwealth coffers to prop up Tasmania’s diminishing investments in nature conservation from the State’s consolidated revenues.

“The end justifies the means” scenario because when all was said and done - and even the senior Greens politicians were accepting of this - it was in a good cause.

Well sorry I didn’t buy that logic….you don’t have a governmemt agency, ostensibly claiming to be a scientific organisation, trading on misrepresented information and taking advantage of fabricated evidence to secure public funds. When this activity seen in the private sector and proven in the courts, it amounts to fraudulent practice.

Posted by David Obendorf on 26/07/10 at 09:01 PM

All I know is that the baiting that is happening in the Huon will mean less. if not no, holes being dug in my lawn by those pesky native animals. They’re certain to dig up the baits and eat them. Let’s hope the carcases a poisonous to the scavenging foxes (cats, dogs?).

Posted by Stephan on 27/07/10 at 08:16 AM

Mr Johnston ... no going back to the dairy board.
Record sightings Mr Johnston, what good is that?

Posted by Mark on 27/07/10 at 05:57 PM

It’s official! The FEP and its big-brother agency, DPIPWE now publicly acknowledge that a fox ‘came out of a container at the Agfest site in May 2001’. Apparently that fox was seen by numerous witnesses and apparently Quarantine Tasmania officials on site took statements from those who saw the fox escape.

Three years after the 1998 fox escape at Burnie and now 9 years on, our authorities concede that another fox escaped into Tasmanian countryside.

When I told a DPIWE biologist in 2004 that there were formal witness statements about this fox escape at Agfest, it was dismissed as ‘just pub talk’ and yet that fox wandered around the Longford-Carrick for several weeks and was reported on many occasions. Officially this fox sighting is acknowledged as the trigger incident for beginning of Tasmania’s 10-year war on foxes.

In the following month (June 2001) David Llewellyn produced his Confidential Briefing Note on an alleged plot to smuggle in fox cubs for release at various locations in Tasmania.

What a “Fantastic Mr Fox” story! This must be the $40-million-fox if ever there was one!

It should be painfully obvious to everyone now that we have been shafted, like the weapons of mass deception and the Gulf of Tonkin incident.
Ten years on we are fully embedded in the quagmire that is the Tasmanian fox deception saga.
How long must this go on? Until someone in the Government says enough is enough…until someone realizes that 10 years on and we are still getting “fox evidence” but no foxes that this is indeed mass deception.
Anyone that knows anything about foxes would know that none of this adds up…if we are still talking about “eradicating” foxes 9 or 10 years after the initial claims were made the reality is that we would now be over run with foxes… that is not the case.
The Government are in a very dangerous conundrum…are they milking it for all it’s worth? - and then one day will say, well that’s it we got all the foxes, we have done the job we set out to do all those years ago. Or are they in too deep, not knowing what to do and blindly accepting the word of the very people that are on the receiving end of the Government supplied taxpayer funded largesse?
I think the latter, at State and Federal level…it’s called the fear factor.

Posted by Ian Rist on 28/07/10 at 03:33 PM

In April 2005 I wrote a letter to the Mercury newspaper on Tasmania’s war on foxes. It was published under the title: ‘Weapon of mass deception’.

If was read by then Premier, Jim Bacon who stated asking questions of the Minister and his Department’s scientist.

In the last paragraph I wrote: “Keep foxes out of Tasmania by all means, but we do need independent verification of all the ‘hard evidence’. With additional millions requested for future fox activities we run the risk of having a serious imminent threat that might be used as a weapon of mass deception.”

Minister David Llewellyn would not allow for that independent verification. Even when very obvious instances of fabrication of fox material was given formally to the Government, they maintained their adamant position.

In 2002 the Tasmanian Government commissioned a report from me on a preparedness response to the introduction of unwanted animal diseases accepting all of its 38 recommenndations! And yet a few years later a careful analysis of several fox incidents - receiving considerable media coverage - uncovered blatant and basic flaws in the investigation and a failure to demonstrate any relationship between the fox carcases found and the allegation that those foxes had lived and died in Tasmania.

Despite strong personal abuse directed at me by a few public servants, there has been no new and compelling data offered by the Department overseeing this fox eradication budget that changes this troubling situation.

Why is it so?

Posted by David Obendorf on 29/07/10 at 07:55 AM

It’s called “up to their ears in it”......of course they are.
But David it isn’t their money…...............
But as I have always said, “this is going to blow up in someones face one day”.

Posted by Ian Rist on 29/07/10 at 08:16 AM

How much longer are the gov’t of the day going to fork multiple millions of dollars of taxpayers money into this farcical stunt??? I lived for over 50 years on the mainland with foxes about…their calls their killing instincts and also their cunning in getting food in drought times…none of which has happened here. Also during drought they are not so shy and will come into built up areas if there are any means of food to be gained. I can remember stopping my car at night to let a fox cross the road quite near my house as I couldn’t bring myself to hurt it.

Posted by Concerned Resident on 01/08/10 at 01:45 PM

On Saturday 31 July Leo Schofield entered the fox frey with a short introduction to his “My Tasmania” article in the Mercury Magazine.

He upset a few Mercury readers with this statement: “But there are no foxes to hunt in Tasmania….despite extensive scat-scattering, shaky science and attempts tro persuade the public that we are about to be over run by ‘Renard’. So far $40 million has been squandered on the program, and still they spend.”

Forest scientist, Dr Groves of Taroona wrote in response: ‘Healthy sceptism is a good thing but blinkered denial in the face of accumulating evidence defies reason and sniffs of arrogance and ignorance’.

While Bob Hoddernes-Roddam of Austins Feery writes of Leo’s ‘pathetic dig at the state’s attempt to eradicate foxes before they become established. He would be advised to talk to those who are working in the field and to those of us who have had experience of foxes in other parts of the world before displaying his ignorance on the topic.’

Bob Holderness-Roddam has been a ‘foxes are here, there and everywhere’ man for years…your big problem Bob, is that in nine years your fox chasing friends have not been able to trap, shoot, poison or even photograph a fox in Tasmania…easily fooled is letting you off lightly.
Accumulation of evidence Dr Groves? What - imported fox scats, imported fox carcasses,chicken blood contaminated with fox DNA and a few Whippet foot prints…post 2001 that is all you have.
After nine years if there are foxes here as claimed the FEP is obviously incompetent, or alternatively there simply aren’t any foxes here.
You just cannot have it both ways.
Planting evidence is one thing, coming up with a real fox is another.
Go along to one of the FEP’s community engagement sessions and you will see just how desperate they really are.

First two sentences: “What adjectives apply to the fox? - sly? slinking? cunning? deceitful? He has lived by his trickery in fables for centuries.”

It is the opportunism of humans; their deception and trickery that made the fox into a creature of fabled story-tales.

Eric goes on to say: “I have respect for the fox though its coming here [Australia] was a tragedy. I have no respect for hunters and their dogs.”

Tally Ho!

Posted by David Obendorf on 05/08/10 at 11:56 AM

With apologies to A. B.(Banjo) Paterson:

‘There was movement at the station *,
For the word had got around,
That the fox from old Regret had got away,
And joined the wily bush renards,
For he was worth a thousand pounds!’

* - Canny Renard Centre.

Posted by David Obendorf on 05/08/10 at 06:23 PM

Interesting stuff from the DPIWE’s own site….

“We quickly found that a greater variety of wildlife would eat Foxoff than would (or could) eat the dried kangaroo meat baits. Key amongst these was the Eastern Bettong, a small omnivorous macropod”.
Why the hell are we using it in Tasmania then? Especially when it was found to be the least palatable bait to foxes in field and cage trials conducted by the CSIRO.

Can anyone answer the question? Why the obsession with laying hundreds of thousands 1080 Foxoff baits in Tasmania in such a methodical systematic fashion?

This propaganda pseudo-science of the Fox Eradication Program that Tasmanian wildlife species are somehow ‘tolerant to 1080’ because they ‘co-evolved’ with plants containing fluoracetate has got to stop.

Unless they haven’t realised, Tasmania IS NOT Western Australia and the tolerance to the poison 1080 by Tasmanian bettongs IS NOT the same as that demonstrated for Woylies (WA Brush-tail bettongs)!

Posted by David Obendorf on 07/08/10 at 08:28 AM

The cheek of some people…http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/31/2997912.htm
What… a couple of harmless fox pelts prepared for taxidermy compared to hundreds of fox scats secretly imported into Tasmania from hydatid prone areas and then scattered all over the Tasmanian landscape for detector dogs to “find” to bolster the funding drive for a department that is out of control.
Problem is Mr sharp thinks he is in control and therein lies the problem.
It would appear we had better ready torpedo tubes 2-3- and 4.

Posted by Ian Rist on 01/09/10 at 09:02 AM

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Before you submit your comment, please make sure that it complies with Tasmanian Times Code of Conduct.